[BIG POPPA]

We do have a Seattle meet coming up. I could help with the experiment. Let me know.

 

[Prog Rock Man]

 
Quote:

We could indeed use members that could host mini meets with members willing to attend. Should we dare answer this question with a genuine lambskin covered, snakeoil laden, unicorn dreamin test?

Quote:

We do have a Seattle meet coming up. I could help with the experiment. Let me know.

 

[Happy Camper]

I'm working on one in Cincinnati in November. May not be enough time for the gang to do the scientific parameters or the cable type. ICs, power cables, digital/optical cables?

 

[maverickronin]

This isn't strictly on topic, but its something I wanted to address.  A bit of undercurrent I've noticed in some of the 'pro-cable' posts is that 'anti-cable' people, people who ask for evidence, are somehow detached from the music that all this gear we talk about is supposed to be used to reproduce.  That we're just looking at numbers, graphs, and data instead of actually listening to the music.  Ironically, it seems to be just the opposite to me.  I'll get to that in a minute, but first let's ask one question.  What's the purpose of this equipment and the discussion that accompanies it?

All this gear is so we can listen to music, right?  Most people can't afford to keep a symphony orchestra and half a dozen cover bands on staff.  Even those that can afford it, generally don't.  I can listen to single movement of a symphony played by a world class orchestra, follow that up with some death metal, and then add a J pop flavored cherry on top.  Talk about miracles of modern technology, huh?  That's why I own audio gear.  That's why most people own audio gear.

In a general sense, I don't really care too much how the signal gets to my ears.  Just that it does get there and sounds good in the end.  In practical terms I found it necessary to become acquainted with the technology that gets the sound to my ears.  Otherwise how would I know what buy?  How would I get a good deal?  If I had more money than spare time I could just buy the second or so most expensive product in each category and get some good results.  Like most people though, I have more time than money.  I'm looking for value.  I'm looking for a deal.  I want the cheapest equipment that can give me the level of SQ I want.  Its a simple conclusion.  I'm in it for the music, not the gear.

This is why I do not call myself and audiophile.  The term seems to have changed over the years.  Apparently it use to mean something like a music enthusiast who places a large emphasis on high fidelity.  I say 'apparently' because being somewhat young, I can't remember a time when it meant that.  To people my age (mid 20's) it means something quite a bit different.  A music enthusiast listens to the music through the equipment.  An audiophile listens to the equipment through the music.  That's the definition I grew up with.  Not explicitly stated as such, but that was the undertone.  I'm not sure what I should call myself instead.  "Music enthusiast" is a bit longwinded. I'm not a musician of any sort either.  If anyone feels the same way and has an idea, then I'm all ears.  I just know I can't call myself an audiophile.

Many self proclaimed audiophiles do little to dispel this idea.  Some actually encourage it.  That's just all kinds of messed up.  Did you buy your speakers to listen to music, or buy music to listen to your speakers.  There have been threads here where people have asked for headphones that sound good without revealing the sometimes unavoidable flaws of poor production or compression.  What was single most common response?  Listen to different music.  The mind, it boggles!  What kind of twisted logic is that?  I suppose its ok if you really do want to listen to the equipment instead of the music.  Maybe I'm getting some posts mixed up, but I'm pretty sure I've seen people tell others to just listen, trust your ears, and not worry about evidence in one thread while telling someone else to change their taste in music in order listen to better recordings in another.  Which side are they on?

There's a good reason to worry about evidence though.  I don't have to wax philosophical to convince anyone of it either.  It comes down to money.  If you're in this hobby for the music, and if you're not troubled by an exceedingly fat wallet, then you are probably looking for some degree of value.  Maybe not in an absolute sense - this hobby is all about the last few percent after all.  You're still probably looking to get something for your money.  People may argue about the relative value of the latest pair of $1K+ headphones, but pretty much everyone agrees that you get something for all that cash.  Fancy cables don't do anything but (usually) look good.  They're tinsel.  They seem to appeal to people who are in it for the gear and not the music.  (That's not to say that this is true of all of them.)  Maybe they like collecting, maybe they're trying to prove something (like how much money they can afford to blow), maybe they honestly like listening to the equipment through the music, or maybe they've just been deceived and really think that cables do make a difference.  I can't really say who's who, but that's how it comes across to me.

I can say that if you really are into this hobby for the music you should carefully consider evidence before making a purchase.  It would be great if fancy cables really could improve SQ.  If someone figured out how it's supposed to work, how to measure it, and how to manufacture such a cable it would be great.  It would be an easy upgrade that you could apply to any system.  DIY would be dirt cheap, and monoprice would no doubt break in on the new market, driving down prices everywhere.  It would be an easy win-win.  Unfortunately the evidence points in the opposite direction.  A well made $10 cable is as good as it gets for just about all domestic applications.

If your first priority is the music (after budget anyway), then you should look at the evidence and find the best way to maximize SQ within the limits of your budget.  If you don't, then its likely either the music is not your first priority or you have money to blow.  This has been a little long and rambling, (even by my standards) but my main point is that people like me who ask for evidence are in it for the music at least as much as anyone else.  If anything we're into the music more, since we make the gear subservient to it.  We use the gear to achieve a goal beyond the gear itself.  Without the goal of the music, the gear would have no value to us.  We wouldn't discus it, study it, tweak it, or spend money on it.  We'd have another hobby instead.

That's my take anyway.  As usual, tell me where I went wrong.  Maybe I missed something.  Maybe our mindsets are just fundamentally incompatible and what seems obvious to me is an anathema to you.

 

[Cymbal Monkey]

You sir, are an inspiration to us all.

 

[Happy Camper]

I hope you feel better to have that off your chest.

 

[aimlink]

Maverickronin,
Thanks for sharing those impressions.  I was spot on with you for the first 4 to 5 paragraphs, but then I began to see things differently thereafter.
 
The long and short of it is that for both sides, there'll always be those who are primarily in this for the music and those who apparently aren't, though I'd wager that those who apparently aren't, are actually fewer than we would think.  We all see this as a hobby, and one that is multi-faceted.  If one is into gear, this doesn't take away from the primary purpose of his enthusiasm for gear and that's his music.  Same for cables and same for taking part in these long discussions that have nothing to do with each of our latest thrills on CD's or SACD's.
 
What I see is a lot of intolerance for and a lack of understanding of the point of views that are different and interests that differ for one as opposed another.  If priorities differ with regard to gear when compared to mine, then it must be for a misguided reason (it's about listening to gear with my music) while mine is the balanced one ( it's about listening to music with my gear).  What further shows up this sort of self-righteous attitude is the 'I'm not here to get advice except about what I ask' position that is often taken.  After-all, my horizons and perspectives are wide and wholesome enough that I don't need any advice on what music or recordings may be worth looking into or what aspect of listening may be useful looking at and which could make what's already enjoyable, even that more enjoyable.
 
So there are different ways in which we can take advice and listen to suggestions that we aren't particularly looking for or are expecting.  It could, through experimentation, make for an educational experience.  However, you will not learn if you don't wish to or if you think you have it all figured out.  This, of course, similarly goes for pro-cablers or ant-cablers who do not wish to entertain the arguments from both sides. 

 

[maverickronin]

Quote:

You sir, are an inspiration to us all.

That makes me feel honored and depressed all at the same time.
 
Quote:

I hope you feel better to have that off your chest.

I'd been waiting for someone to post something that would merit something similar as a response for a few days on this or the other thread.  I decided to just write it down and post it so I didn't forget about it.  That, and I seem to have plenty of free time at work.

 

[maverickronin]

@aimlink
 
My point wasn't that its somehow not ok to get caught up in your gear from time to time, or even all the time.  My point is that evidence based audiophiles (that's too longwinded too...) are not obsessed with measurements to the point of not bothering to enjoy the music, and if there is any such correlation it likely runs in the opposite direction, with people so obsessed with voodoo tweaks that they don't bother to enjoy the music.  I can't say for sure it does, but that's the feeling I get.
 
I think that the idea of on-topic advice is a good one.  People may have all kinds of constraints besides budget.  "Recommend a headphone that does X, Y, and Z," is a very different question than "Recommend an upgrade so my system does X, Y, and Z."  You usually shouldn't answer if you're not going to respect the question.  If someone makes it clear they're not interested in doing A, B, or C then you really shouldn't suggest it unless that's the only way to achieve the questioner's goal.
 
Also, are you actually defending the idea of recommending music based solely on recording/production quality?  To be clear, I have seen people recommend that other people stop listening to music they like because the can't get it at a high level of quality and listen to some other random music just because its produced/recorded better.  It's only defensible if you really are just listening to the gear.  That's not inherently wrong, but it is very odd unless you're professionally reviewing or designing the stuff.  Its also a completely different context.

 

[aimlink]

Quote:

 

I hate replying like this, but for want of a better way.  
Originally Posted by maverickronin /img/forum/go_quote.gif
 
@aimlink
 
My point wasn't that its somehow not ok to get caught up in your gear from time to time, or even all the time.  My point is that evidence based audiophiles (that's too longwinded too...) are not obsessed with measurements to the point of not bothering to enjoy the music, and if there is any such correlation it likely runs in the opposite direction, with people so obsessed with voodoo tweaks that they don't bother to enjoy the music.  I can't say for sure it does, but that's the feeling I get.
 
I'm just saying that you feel this way because you're on the side of the fence that you are.  Here you are being erroneously accused of being more obsessed with measurements rather than the music.  I agree that it's erroneous.  However, you're doing the same now, i.e., erroneously ascribing the other side of being obsessed with voodoo tweaks??  Gee....
 
This is what I was alluding to about intolerance and lack of understanding of views and priorities that differ from yours.
 
I think that the idea of on-topic advice is a good one.  People may have all kinds of constraints besides budget.  "Recommend a headphone that does X, Y, and Z," is a very different question than "Recommend an upgrade so my system does X, Y, and Z."  You usually shouldn't answer if you're not going to respect the question.  If someone makes it clear they're not interested in doing A, B, or C then you really shouldn't suggest it unless that's the only way to achieve the questioner's goal.
 
What if they don't make restrictions as clearly as you say, which is often the case?
 
Thankfully, it is indeed infrequent for someone to not acknowledge the suggestions.  I do read the notable exceptions too when I happen to come across them.
 
Also, are you actually defending the idea of recommending music based solely on recording/production quality?  To be clear, I have seen people recommend that other people stop listening to music they like because the can't get it at a high level of quality and listen to some other random music just because its produced/recorded better.  It's only defensible if you really are just listening to the gear.  That's not inherently wrong, but it is very odd unless you're professionally reviewing or designing the stuff.  Its also a completely different context.
 
From your POV it may be so.  However, it may actually not be defensible from only that perspective.  I ask that you consider this from outside of your own 'box', erm... perspective.  I can attest to this very thing from personal experience.  Since my head-fi journey, the breadth of my listening has indeed widened on the very recommendation you find so inappropriate.   There are groups that I've never heard of that I love listening to now after trying as some suggest.  Of course, I still listen to what I used to listen to and will not stop on the basis that the recordings are lousy.  However, there's no denying what a great recording can do for a listening experience.... and it's not simply down to listening to gear.  It's more about listening at a high level of fidelity without having to be at the concert.  It's an exploration.  As you say, the tools involved will feature of course since there's so much to choose from.  IMO, a well done studio recording is quite different from a concert experience.  Both are very different listening experiences in their own right.  Quite different in intent and execution.
 
Finally, I don't think anybody would ever really suggest music based solely on production quality.  They may highlight the music based on production quality, but I think it's misleading to say that the recommender doesn't like the actual music on each recommended recording.

 

[Uncle Erik]

aimlink, our point is not one of constant testing. It's due diligence, and I use it in every part of my life. If someone comes to me and wants me to invest in a company with 20% returns, I want to see the financials. I'll test those financials and look to third parties and other sources to see if the financials are real or fiction. If the financials come up fishy or the person makes lame excuses as to why they don't exist, I'll call BS on it. Let's face it, people lie to get what they want. That might be for money or lots of other reasons. We bought a rental property recently. Of ckurse the seller wanted to sell and said lots of stuff. I did not take that at face value. Instead, I ran the numbers, looked at comparative rents, taxes, everything. It checked out so we bought it.

I've done the same with buying equipment. When I picked up the Zana, I had lots of questions for Craig. And he answered all of them. I even did a casual cost analysis of the parts and labor to see if it was a good deal. Turns out it was a fair deal considering how much it costs to build one. So I bought it.

When I've tried to do due diligence on cables, I repeatedly came up empty. The claims don't check out when compared to real world measurements and no one was talking when it came to R&D. The real nail in the coffin was doing a cost analysis. No matter how you slice it, they come up as massive profit makers. That set off my BS detector in an awful way. I bought a few anyway and found no difference. Fortunately, I sold them at a small loss. I still use the VDH phono cable since it was essentially free with the tonearm and because it functions.

I don't spend much time measuring my gear, there's little point in that and I vet everything before I buy. I feel sorry for people who take marketing claims at face value and never question what they're told. I think it's a little bit sad that people spend a lot of time listening for "differences" in cable, switching things around, and so on. What a waste of money and time. It's better to forget about the unproven nonsense, then sit back and enjoy listening knowing that there isn't some magical bit of wire that might make it better.

You have to perform due diligence with everything. Any time someone tries to sell you something, ask lots of questions and use independent sources to confirm. Same goes for politics and belief systems, but I won't go into that here. If you don't get good answers that check against independent sources, watch out. That means someone is trying to screw you.

 

[aimlink]

Uncle Erik, I can assure you that I'm not one of those who consider the anti-cablers to obsess over measurements rather than their music.  I've never felt this way and never will.  So there's no need to justify to me specifically, if that was your intent.  I'm fully with you and your own intentions and I've long respected them for what they are.  If we all didn't have a love for music, we wouldn't have an interest in listening to music at high fidelity.  How would any of us feel if someone uninterested in high end gear were to advise us while waving their iPod earbuds at us, that we need to stop obsessing over our gear and get more involved in the music?  They don't understand that the music is still central.  The very same thing happens here on head-fi.
 
So I'm with you on this and fully understand your due diligence.  We each exercise our diligence in different ways and to different degrees.  We're not the same and our priorities will differ.  It's this sharing that makes for the head-fi hum.  Unfortunately imposing one's priorities on another is very different from simply sharing one's priorities with another.   Aggressive intolerance is a symptom of the former.  Again, I don't see where you deserve to be accused of this, but there are way too many who step over the line in this regard.

 

[xnor]

I don't understand your problem aimlink.
 
Everyone is free to visit the sound science forum, read the posts/contributions - or choose not to.
You can take everything with a grain of salt, and probably should (#1 head-fi "rule"?). I don't think anyone is forcing sb. else to believe what he believes. Here you're free to discuss pretty much anything you want, *even DBT*! (sad... do you see the irony?)
Nobody is forcing you to participate in discussions, and nobody is hindering you from turning your back on them, as well as we cannot stop you from posting whatever (well, mind head-fi rules) you want.
 
 
 
=> I'd say many of us "evidence-welcoming" folks are tolerant. You say you can hear a difference between cable A and B. Fine, I believe you.
But do you (or anyone else) have any evidence that there's in fact a *sonic* difference? Don't think so. Can you deny that there's nothing psychological going on? Don't think so. Does that make me intolerant?
 
Why are many pro-cablers so intolerant towards science?

 

[SP Wild]

 
Quote:

Uncle Erik, I can assure you that I'm not one of those who consider the anti-cablers to obsess over measurements rather than their music.  I've never felt this way and never will.  So there's no need to justify to me specifically, if that was your intent.  I'm fully with you and your own intentions and I've long respected them for what they are.  If we all didn't have a love for music, we wouldn't have an interest in listening to music at high fidelity.  How would any of us feel if someone uninterested in high end gear were to advise us while waving their iPod earbuds at us, that we need to stop obsessing over our gear and get more involved in the music?  They don't understand that the music is still central.  The very same thing happens here on head-fi.
 
So I'm with you on this and fully understand your due diligence.  We each exercise our diligence in different ways and to different degrees.  We're not the same and our priorities will differ.  It's this sharing that makes for the head-fi hum.  Unfortunately imposing one's priorities on another is very different from simply sharing one's priorities with another.   Aggressive intolerance is a symptom of the former.  Again, I don't see where you deserve to be accused of this, but there are way too many who step over the line in this regard.

I agree with you aimlink.  UE is amongst the more respected cable sceptics in this forum - I find him to be knowledgable and his interests lay firmly in headphones and not science.  This is a headphone forum...we purchase expensive headphones, cheap headphones, pretty headphones, antique headphones...and everything else related to headphones.  Then there are a certain breed of science types that seem to want to remove this enjoyment.  It is about the headphone - it is about the product.  Isn't there like an Itunes forum or something to discuss musical content and hydrogen audio forum or something to discuss the measurement and DBT aspects.  I am increasingly becoming unappreciative of this so called science forum - it seems to revolve around arguing about cables, DBT, and measurements - are these the only defining attributes of science?
 
There was a thread about EQ, Binaural recordings, and various other interesting aspects of science in audio, but I find sometimes these threads ruined by arguments about DBT, cables and measurements.  I am sick to death of this topic already.  Two places that head-fi can do without, this current cable debating science forum and the snobby hi-end forum (and I think there's another headphone forum in the web for this as well).

 

[xnor]

Quote:

 
Then there are a certain breed of science types that seem to want to remove this enjoyment.

Complaining isn't going to change the laws of physics.
 
 
Does trying to reduce the odds of being ripped off necessarily reduce enjoyment in this hobby? Don't think so.